This publication for child
welfare workers is produced
four times a year by the North
Carolina Division of Social
Services and the Family and
Children’s Resource Program,
part of the Jordan Institute for
Families and the School of
Social Work at the University
of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill.
In summarizing research, we try
to give you new ideas for refining your practice. However, this
publication is not intended to
replace child welfare training,
regular supervision, or peer
consultation—only to enhance
them.
Let us hear from you!
To comment about something
that appears in this or any other issue of Children’s Services
Practice Notes, please send
your comments to:
John McMahon
Jordan Institute for Families
School of Social Work
UNC–Chapel Hill
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3550
[email protected]
Newsletter Staff
Lane Cooke
Jamie Hamlett
Ellen Ozier Hayes
John McMahon
Jeanne Preisler
Visit Our Website
www.practicenotes.org
References for the articles in
this issue can be found at
<www.practicenotes.org>
CHILD WELFARE, JUVENILE JUSTICE, AND THE COURTS
The child welfare system is responsible for
the safety, permanence, and well-being of
the children it touches. We are charged with
ensuring they are protected from abuse and
neglect, stay in their homes whenever possible, have stability in their living situations, and
preserve their past connections. On top of
this, we must also meet children’s educational, physical, and mental health needs and increase the capacity of their families to meet
their needs.
That’s a pretty tall order. So how can these
goals be attained when the youth in question
is also deemed delinquent in the juvenile
justice system?
CHILD MALTREATMENT
Over the past 30 years research has clearly
and consistently identified childhood victimization and maltreatment as a risk factor for
subsequent delinquency and violence.
According to the Child Welfare League of
America’s Juvenile Justice Division (2002),
abused or neglected children are more likely than other children to be arrested:
• As juveniles (27% vs. 17%),
• As adults (42% vs. 33%), and
• For commiting a violent crime
(18% vs. 14%).
CWLA’s research also shows that abused and
neglected children tend to be younger at their
first arrest, commit nearly twice as many offenses, and are arrested more frequently.
PLACEMENT AND DELINQUENCY
What do we know specifically about juvenile
delinquency and the youth in foster care?
Delinquency rates are about 47% greater for
youth associated with at least one substantiated report of maltreatment (Ryan & Testa,
2005).
A recent study by Ryan,
Herz, Hernandez, and
Marshall (2007) sought
to determine whether
there is a child welfare
bias in juvenile justice
Not all maltreated
processing. They found
children commit
that children whose delindelinquent acts,
quency cases originated
but some do. We
in foster care were less
must know how to
respond.
likely to receive probation
than those children not in
foster care. Results also indicated that the
child welfare system itself is a significant
reason African American youth are disproportionally represented in the juvenile
justice system. Finally, the study found that
youth coming from the child welfare
system are younger and more likely to be
female.
This link to offending at a younger age
is not good news, since other research
found young offenders to be three times
more likely to become serious violent
offenders (Burns, et al., 2003).
These findings have significant implications for all of us connected with the child
welfare system. Although not all maltreated children will commit a delinquent act,
some will. Therefore we have a duty to understand the juvenile justice system and how
it interacts with the child welfare system,
and we need to know how to decrease the
delinquent behavior of youth in foster care.
This issue of Practice Notes will provide
you with some of the information you need
to fulfill this responsibility. Photo: Ellen Ozier
Volume 12, Number 4
August 2007
JUVENILE JUSTICE: A BRIEF OVERVIEW
A little more than 100 years ago, we
had one system of justice in the United States. We treated children as we
would treat adults when they committed a crime. We even put children as
young as seven years old to death for
their crimes (Taylor, et al., 2002).
In the late 1800’s, children were
considered property and often sold by
their parents to wealthy businessmen.
Children were placed in the workforce
or apprenticed at very young ages.
During this period a group of women known as the “child savers” were
successful in convincing some key politicians to treat children who committed crimes differently than adults. As
a result, in 1899 the juvenile justice
system was born. Child labor practices, child abuse, runaways, and other
issues facing juveniles were also reviewed during this time.
CHANGING ATTITUDES
Just as the child welfare system has
experienced different philosophical
trends over the years, so has the juvenile justice system. The basic assumption that led to the creation of a
separate system of justice was that,
compared to an adult, a child is less
mature and therefore less capable of
intent when committing a crime. Because of their limited capacity for intent, it was believed that children could
be rehabilitated more easily. This is
often referred to as the traditional
model of juvenile justice. Under this
model it was believed that the best interests of the child were always paramount and that treatment and rehabilitation could prevent further delinquency.
Around 1960, another way of looking at juvenile offenders emerged and
more similarities to the adult criminal
justice system were introduced. Children, no longer viewed as property,
2
were seen as having rights and as
deserving “due process.” They now
had a right to counsel, to notice of
charges, to confront and cross-examine witnesses, to remain silent, and to
be protected from double jeopardy.
Under this due process model of
juvenile justice it was believed that the
best interests of the child should be
sought while providing fundamental
fairness and due process.
In the early 1980’s to present day,
the model guiding the juvenile justice
system changed again. Under the current punitive model the focus is more
on the best interests of society rather
than on the child’s best interests. The
more serious the crime, the more
society needs to be protected from the
culprit. This is more aligned with the
adult criminal justice system. This approach to juvenile justice attempts to
prevent future offenses by punishing
youth, removing them from society,
and holding them accountable.
TYPES OF OFFENSES
In North Carolina the juvenile justice
system is notified of a youth’s delinquent behavior by parents, social
services, or law enforcement.
YOU SHOULD KNOW
• A child must be six years old in
North Carolina to be adjudicated in
the juvenile justice system.
• North Carolina does not allow jury
trials in juvenile proceedings.
• A child 16 years of age or older is
automatically waived to adult court
and subject to the same penalties
as adults, though he or she is not
subject to the death penalty.
• If the crime is severe, the court can
ask that a child as young as 13
years old be waived to adult court.
Delinquency is any behavior prohibited by state juvenile law and
includes anything from underage
drinking to murder. These offenses fall
into two categories: delinquent and
status. A delinquent act is anything
that would be a crime if committed
by an adult. A status offense is an
act that would not be considered a
crime if committed by an adult, but
which is forbidden to children. For
example, running away, violating curfew, skipping school (truancy), underage drinking, and smoking cont. p. 3
JUVENILE CRIMES AND OFFENSES IN NC, 2006
Figure 1
Infractions 1%
(348)
Total Complaints
Received: 48,089
Status/Undiciplined 11%
(5,169)
Felony A-E 3%
(1,207)
Delinquent
Complaints: 89%
Complaints
Committed by
Males: 75%
Undisciplined
Complaints: 11%
Misdemeanor 1-3
63% (30,920)
Felony F-1
A1 Misdemeanor
22% (10,445)
Source: NCDJJDP, 2007
from p. 2
are all status offenses. A youth can
also be alleged to be undisciplined
if he or she is deemed by a judge to
be incorrigible or ungovernable.
JUVENILE JUSTICE IN 2006
According to the NC Department of
Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 29 youth were transferred to
adult court in 2006. These youth, if
convicted, would be placed in one of
the two youth prisons operated by the
Department of Corrections. As of
2005, our state had 44 youth serving
sentences of life without parole.
In 2006, North Carolina received
48,089 complaints against juveniles.
Eleven percent were for status offenses. The majority of the status offenses
were for ungovernable youth, followed
by truancy and youth who had run
away.
As Figure 1 shows, the remaining
89% of the complaints were considered delinquent complaints (misdemeanors 63%, felonies 25%, infractions 1%). Seventy-five percent were
committed by males; 41% were committed by White youth and 50% were
committed by African-American youth.
Although most of these cases were
processed by the juvenile court system, some were handled by Family
Courts. Characterized by a less adversarial approach to justice, Family
Court programs currently exist in 11
districts (including 18 counties) in
North Carolina. To learn more about
them and how they serve families and
children connected with child welfare,
turn the page. The NC Dept. of Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency
Prevention’s 2006 annual
report is online:
<www.ncdjjdp.org>
JUVENILE JUSTICE TERMS
North Carolina child welfare agencies must complete the DSS Critical Incident
Report (rev. June 2007) for any youth who commits the status offense of running
away (for more than 24 hours) and for any youth who commits a delinquent act and
gets “arrested.” Yet when you speak to police about what’s happened, do they use
the word “arrested”? No. Police will tell you the youth was “taken into custody,”
which for a juvenile is the same as arrest. This is one of many different terms child
welfare professionals must understand when working with youth who come in
contact with the juvenile justice system. To help you we provide the following outline
of the different terms used by the adult and juvenile justice systems.
Juvenile Justice
Criminal Justice
Adjudication – Decision by a juvenile court judge that
the juvenile committed a delinquent act
Conviction
Adjudication Hearing – A hearing to determine whether there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to support
the allegations against the juvenile
Trial
Aftercare – Supervision of a juvenile after release from
an institution
Parole
Commitment – Decision by a juvenile court judge to send
the adjudicated juvenile to an institution
Sentence to prison
Delinquent Act – A behavior committed by a juvenile
that would have been a crime if committed by an adult
Crime
Delinquent – A juvenile who has been adjudicated of a
delinquent act in juvenile court or family court
Criminal
Detention – Short-term secure confinement of a juvenile
to protect the juvenile and/or society
Confinement in jail
Detention Center – A facility for short-term secure confinement of juveniles prior to court disposition or execution
of a court order. NC has ten detention centers;
four counties operate their own centers.
Jail
Disposition – The sanction imposed on a juvenile who
has been adjudicated in juvenile court
Sentence
Disposition Hearing – A hearing held after a juvenile
has been adjudicated to determine what sanction should
be imposed on the juvenile
Sentencing hearing
Institution – A facility for long-term secure confinement
of juveniles after adjudication. NC has five Youth Development Centers where youth between ages 6 and 15
are committed for treatment for a minimum of six months.
Prison
Petition – A document that states the allegations against
a juvenile and asks a juvenile court to adjudicate the juvenile
Indictment
Taken into Custody – The action on the part of a police
officer to obtain custody of a juvenile accused of committing a delinquent act
Arrest
Adapted from Taylor, Fritsch & Caeti, 2002
3
FAMILY COURTS IN NORTH CAROLINA
The preceding article described how attitudes about
justice for juvenile offenders have shifted over the years,
moving away from rehabilitation and towards punishment.
The dominance of the punitive model of juvenile justice is
by no means complete, however. Today a very different
approach to handling juvenile justice, child welfare, and
other family-related legal proceedings is making headway across the U.S. In North Carolina this approach is
called Family Court.
FAMILY COURTS
Family Courts emerged in the 1990s in an attempt to
improve the way courts handle domestic cases. Specifically, Family Courts are an effort to embrace and implement certain approaches to judicial procedure and the
handling of court cases in order to:
• Respond more effectively to the increasingly complex
challenges faced by families and children involved
with the judicial system (Future Commission, 1996).
• Improve the experiences of children during the court
process, especially children involved with the child
welfare system (Kirk & Griffith, 2006).
• Expedite permanence and achieve other desirable
child welfare outcomes (Kirk & Griffith, 2006).
• Address court administration issues, particularly the
overcrowding of District Court dockets.
HOW THEY WORK
Family Court programs exist in 11 North Carolina districts
(see box). In each district they operate under the auspices of the Chief District Court Judge, with support from
the Court Programs and Management Services Division
FAMILY COURT PROGRAMS IN NC
Family court programs currently exist in 11 districts (including
18 counties) in North Carolina:
Established as Original Pilot Sites in 1999
District 14: Durham County
District 20: Anson, Richmond, Stanly, and Union Counties
(2005 Legislative Split: District 20A: Anson, Richmond, and Stanly
Counties and District 20B: Union County)
District 26: Mecklenburg County
Established in 2000
District 5: New Hanover and Pender Counties
District 6A: Halifax County
District 12: Cumberland County
Established in 2001
District 8: Greene, Lenoir, and Wayne Counties
District 25: Burke, Caldwell, and Catawba Counties
Established in 2004
District 28: Buncombe County
Established in 2005
District 10: Wake County
4
of the NC Administrative Office
“I wanted to create
of the Courts.
a less adversarial,
North Carolina’s Family
more user-friendly
Courts hear issues relating to the
environment for
families assigned to them. This
families to resolve
includes juvenile delinquency;
their disputes in an
child maltreatment and depenexpeditious manner.”
dency; termination of parental
~Chief District Court
rights; domestic violence; child
Judge H. Paul McCoy
custody and visitation rights; and
divorce and related financial issues such as child support,
alimony, and equitable distribution of property.
In terms of day-to-day operations, the local chief District
Court judge administers each Family Court. He or she is
assisted by a Family Court administrator and one or more
case coordinators assigned to domestic and juvenile court.
HOW ARE THEY DIFFERENT?
Following are some of the things that make Family Courts
different from traditional District Courts. However, it is important to note that because each Chief District Court Judge
has a great deal of discretion, practices vary among North
Carolina’s Family Courts.
Philosophy. The mission of Family Court is to (1) help
resolve cases involving children and families through
combined efforts of the family, the Court, and community
services, (2) approach each case in a way that is not
overly adversarial or intrusive but always in a just, timely,
and efficient manner, and (3) be courteous, safe, and
accessible and to provide quality service to those in need
(Family Court Advisory Committee, 2007).
Timeframes. The goal of Family Court is to resolve
all cases within one year of filing.
Management. In Family Court, the court sets the calendar and manages the case from filing to disposition.
Both judges and court staff receive extensive training on
the fundamentals of effective case flow management
(AOC, 2007).
Family Court Administrators. Some child welfare
agencies have been able to resolve longstanding concerns
about their interaction with the court system (e.g., long,
unproductive wait times for workers on court days) by
working closely with their Family Court administrator.
One Judge, One Family. In Family Courts, a recommended best practice is to have a single judge (or team of
judges) assigned to each family. He or she hears every
issue involving that family, whether it is divorce, child
custody, child maltreatment, dependency, or delinquency.
Chief District Court Judge H. Paul McCoy, who administers the Family Court in District 6A (Halifax County) says
this approach “helps the case proceed through cont. p. 5
from p. 4
the court more expeditiously since the judge is familiar
with the family and the case file and only has to go forward from the last order in the file rather than reviewing
the entire file to familiarize himself with the case.”
Day One Conferences. Another recommended best
practice being applied in some Family Courts, Day One
Conferences (also called “child planning conferences”)
are court-facilitated gatherings held soon after the filing
of an abuse/neglect petition. These events bring everyone—including schools, DSS, mental health, parents,
Guardians ad Litem, and the courts—to the table in a relaxed, respectful environment. The purpose of these meetings is to determine if placement can be found with family
or friends, what services need to be initiated immediately
to expedite resolution of the problems that led to the removal of the children, and to establish a visitation schedule appropriate to the developmental needs of the children and the circumstances of the family (AOC, 2006).
Many times, the things decided in these conferences
are what families and other parties choose for themselves.
This can feel much better to families than having things
mandated by the court. One child welfare professional
told us that as a result of Day One Conferences, “Ninetyeight percent of the time we are able to have an agreement in place before we go in front of the judge.”
In their 2006 evaluation of North Carolina’s Family
Court pilots, Kirk and Griffith identified Day One Conferences as the most important component of Family Court
when it comes to child welfare cases.
Emphasis on Services. Many Family Courts use mediation and other dispute resolution programs to resolve
issues so the court does not have to issue a judgment or
order. However, when a judge does need to hear matters
or issue orders involving a family, case coordinators ensure there is nothing to delay the prompt resolution of the
issue before the court.
Local Family Court Advisory Committees. These
advisory committees, which usually meet two to four times
a year, serve as an important way for stakeholders (including DSS) to bring their concerns to the attention of the
Family Court and to suggest strategies for resolving these
concerns and any other issue the court raises with them.
DO THEY DELIVER?
Do Family Courts do a better job than traditional District
Courts when it comes to achieving positive outcomes for
families and children?
If your focus is on child welfare outcomes, the current
evidence suggests the answer is yes. Kirk and Griffith found
that children whose cases were handled by Family Court
experienced fewer placements, fewer placement chang-
BENEFITS OF FAMILY COURT
A 2006 evaluation found that compared
to children whose cases were handled in
District Court, children served by Family
Court experienced:
• Fewer placements
• Fewer placement changes, and
• Fewer days in out-of-home care
In its March 2007 review of North Carolina’s child welfare
system, the federal government found Family Courts to be
a promising practice when it comes to achieving permanency for children.
Source: Kirk & Griffith, 2006; USDHHS, 2007
es, and fewer days in out-of-home care than children whose
cases were handled in District Court.
They also concluded that Family Courts performed better
than traditional District Courts on most court functions. For
example, they found the Family Courts they studied generally “required fewer judges per child case, more rapidly connected families with court resources, utilized fewer
court days per completed hearing by limiting the number
of continuances granted, and achieved case milestones
more rapidly than the comparison District Courts” (National Child Welfare Resource Center on Legal and Judicial Issues, 2007).
This certainly fits with the experience of Halifax County. According to Judge McCoy, the average time it takes a
domestic case to move from filing to disposition in the 11
Family Court districts in North Carolina is 113 days. Statewide, in the non-Family Court districts, the average is 313
days. In Judge McCoy’s district the average is 59.5 days.
(Note: this is for domestic cases—usually timeframes for
abuse, neglect, and dependency cases are longer.)
Carolyn Poythress, Program Administrator for Child Welfare Services at Halifax County DSS, believes Family Courts
have helped her agency achieve more timely and successful outcomes for children. She says that together Family
Court and the Multiple Response System (North Carolina’s child welfare reform effort) are redefining the way
we engage families and children and raising awareness
about families’ needs.
Poythress points out that most of the time, even before
it gets to Family Court, DSS has already “helped the family understand that we are not out to get them and if we
get to court, it is because we had no other option. The
families’ being able to see us as advocates from the beginning is making what we do more successful.”
To learn more about Family Courts in North Carolina,
visit <www.nccourts.org>. 5
THE ART OF TESTIFYING IN COURT
by Jamie Hamlett, JD, Attorney for the Alamance County Department of Social Services
Testifying in court is an art, one that can only be mastered
through practice and experience. The next time you are
called upon to take the stand, remember that as a witness
you are the artist. The audience—in particular the judge—
is your canvas. Your paintbrushes are the words you choose
and your paints are the facts you have to relate. Although
you must never change the facts, the way you apply them
to the canvas can make all the difference.
This article is for those of you who, as part of your work
in child welfare, must occasionally take the stand and paint
a picture for the judge.
FOLLOW THE BASIC RULES
As social workers, you are expected to be competent and
professional. Judges look to you as the experts in the area
of child welfare. To live up to that expectation you need to
know how to testify in court, which means following what I
call the four basic rules:
1. Always tell the truth, even if it hurts. If you
don’t, it is sure to come back on you in some way. When
you get caught in a lie, even a “small” lie, it forever hurts
your credibility in the eyes of that judge. A lie will not only
impact your credibility in the case at hand but in every
case for which you testify from that point forward.
2. Don’t be afraid to admit you didn’t hear or
understand a question. Most lawyers love the sound of
their own voice, so chances are they won’t mind repeating what they have said.
3. Stop talking when someone says, “Objection.”
The judge will tell you whether to answer the question.
4. Don’t forget: always tell the truth.
MAKE A GOOD IMPRESSION
Remember your mother telling you that you can never
take back your first impression? This is especially true for
the professional testifying in the courtroom. Therefore,
your first impression must be strong and positive.
Dress appropriately. Wear professional, conservative attire. Your demeanor during court proceedings should
be equally professional.
Behave properly. While you are waiting for your case
to be called, be attentive, quiet, and respectful. The judge
is observing more than just the parties at hand. This is
particularly true if you have a presiding judge who is a
stickler for certain issues. For example, if the judge does
not like drinks or food in the courtroom, do not be the
person who gets called out for having drinks and food in
the court. You run the risk of making the judge angry at
you before you even start, and you set a poor example
6
for others who have less exposure to
the court system.
Body language is key. Stand and
sit tall in the courtroom. Your body language can exude confidence or weakness. When people are teaching selfJamie Hamlett
defense classes, it is often taught that
muggers profile their victims. A person walking slouched
over with his eyes cast to the ground is more likely to be
prey than someone who is aware of his surroundings and
walking upright. Let your body language signal to the opposing party that you are not going to be the next victim.
Speak to the court with respect. Even if you do not
respect the judge on a given day, give the court the respect it deserves. The court is the best system we have for
resolving controversies and administering justice in this
country. The ideal and principles that stand behind the
courtroom are to be admired and respected by all.
PREPARE FOR COURT
In Alamance County, I have the luxury of the being the inhouse attorney. That means I can often meet with workers
prior to court to help them organize, predict, and prepare. Yet because in-house attorneys are fairly rare, I’d
like to give you a few tips for preparing yourself prior to a
court appearance.
Do good work. Although you may think your initial
presentation to the courtroom is your first opportunity to
impress the court, the truth is that you begin preparing
your testimony the moment you begin working with a family.
The best method for having good testimony is to follow
best practices in your work. In addition to doing the right
thing, you will feel more confident and secure knowing
that your underlying work is thorough and can withstand
the scrutiny of the opposing party.
Review and make notes. Prior to court, review your
records. When social workers come to my office, I hand
them large note cards on which to make the notes they
will use during testimony. Reviewing the file and taking
notes helps them internalize information and keep it fresh.
When they are on the witness stand, the note cards are
easier to use than large pieces of bulky paper. The truth
is, once workers have put all that effort into preparing,
they rarely have to refer to notes.
When a worker does not review the file prior to court,
the testimony often comes across as sloppy, unorganized,
and less credible. Put yourself in the judge’s position:
every time a question is asked, the social cont. p. 7
from p. 6
worker must take long pauses to flip through voluminous
records. At some point, you will begin to think that this
case is not important to the worker. Although a witness
should feel free to think and take time when answering
questions, taking long pauses can cause frustration for
those waiting. Be prepared. Know your case.
Practice. Practicing your testimony is key. Sit in front
of a mirror or get a peer to help you go through some
practice questions. When you are practicing, identify
areas of weakness in your case. This will give you an
opportunity to think through those weaknesses and develop an appropriate response.
When you are reviewing a case and discover a huge
flaw, bring that to the attention of your attorney immediately. Often it is better for your attorney to intentionally
bring out a weakness than to have it brought out by the
opposing attorney during cross-examination. This can also
add to your credibility.
IN THE COURTROOM
Now you are on the witness stand. What should you do?
Tell the truth. (I may have said that already.)
Stick to the facts. The court wants facts. Do not share
your opinions unless asked to do so. The facts should not
be clouded by your emotion or feelings. If you do give an
opinion you should be able to back it up with facts.
Do not be afraid to say you don’t know or do not
remember when asked a question. On one occasion, a
social worker was asked what happened in court. Unfortunately, she could not remember. Rather than admit this,
she proceeded to talk about what she thought happened,
which led her to talk about what she thought the judge was
thinking. At that point I was forced to object to my own
witness! However, the judge was so amused he encouraged her to continue. It was not a good moment.
Avoid jargon and acronyms. Assume your audience
knows nothing. If you do use social work lingo, explain
what it means so everyone will be educated and understand. This is also significant when you consider that the
case could be reviewed by another court on appeal. When
you explain a term in court your explanation enters the
record of the proceedings; this ensures the appeals court
will understand what you are talking about.
Do not fear cross-examination. If you have taken
all the steps above to prepare, you are prepared for crossexamination. During cross-examination you must keep
your composure and professional demeanor.
Don’t take things personally. During one highly
OUR ADVERSARIAL SYSTEM
The U.S. has decided that by presenting strongly opposing points of view in a
courtroom setting, the truth is likely to
emerge. This is the basis of the legal
system.
Lawyers are required by their own
code of ethics to “zealously represent their client’s wishes
and interests.” By this code, a lawyer cannot do what she
believes to be best if that differs from what her client thinks
is best.
This philosophical and ethical foundation puts the opposing counsel’s behavior in a different light. When a social worker asks, “How can this lawyer defend these parents when
this family situation is so harmful to this child?” the answer is
simple: it’s the lawyer’s job. If she did not question every
decision the social worker made, every interviewing technique, and every personal bias, Johnny’s parents would be
getting less than what every citizen of the United States is
entitled to—a competent and zealous defense.
contentious case, a foster parent was being crossexamined by the relatives’ attorney. The foster mother
became very angry because she was being criticized for
her treatment of a family member. The foster mother lashed
out at the attorney, judge, and family member.
From that point on, she had no credibility with the judge.
When she was explaining to the judge the difficulty the
children were having with visitation with the relatives, the
judge’s eyes glazed over.
Take heart. No one is comfortable on the witness stand.
However, you should never feel alone on the witness stand.
Your attorney is your ally. He or she will help jog your
memory when you get lost and try to guide you back when
you go astray. You are not alone.
Remember, every time you testify you are crafting your
art so that you will be better the next time. You will mature
and improve with time. You will learn what to expect and
how to handle situations. Do not be afraid to self-critique
after you testify or ask someone where you did well and
what areas could use improvement. Believe it or not,
attorneys do this as well.
CONCLUSION
You are now prepared to go into the world of testimony.
Remember to paint your picture for those who have never
seen it before. When you get off the witness stand, your
audience should be able to envision what you yourself
have lived! 7
3 KEY RESOURCES FOR DECREASING DELINQUENT BEHAVIORS
When the children and youth they serve are involved with
the juvenile justice system, child welfare professionals sometimes find it difficult to decrease the reoccurrence of delinquent behaviors. Here are three key services in North Carolina that may help.
Therapeutic Foster Care. The Guide to Community Preventive Services conducted a systematic review of
five studies assessing therapeutic foster care. Based on the
evidence, therapeutic foster care was found to reduce
violent crime by chronically delinquent adolescents almost
70%. Therapeutic foster care programs also provide a
significant cost savings for the juvenile justice system.
Currently there are 82 private child-placing agencies
licensed by the NC Division of Social Services. Most of these
agencies provide therapeutic foster care. For a listing go to
< w w w. d h h s . s t a t e . n c . u s / d s s / l i c e n s i n g / d o c s /
cpalistfostercare.pdf>.
Multisystemic Therapy (MST). This is a fairly
new, evidenced-based service provided in North Carolina
that has demonstrated effectiveness. Funded by Medicaid,
MST is an intensive, short-term (3-4 months) home and family
focused treatment approach for delinquent
youth. MST intervenes directly in the youth’s
family (or foster family), peer group,
school, and neighborhood by identifying
and targeting factors that contribute to the
youth’s problem behavior.
To learn more about MST or to find a list of agencies in
North Carolina licensed to offer it, go to <www.mstservices.
com/text/licensed_agencies.htm>.
MAJORS. The program Managing Access for Juvenile Offender Resources and Services (MAJORS) ensures
that no child falls through the cracks and that a system is in
place to identify and track all substance-abusing, adjudicated
youth in counties where the MAJORS program exists. Youth
qualify for the program if they are under 18, adjudicated
delinquent, on probation or under the active supervision of a
juvenile court counselor, and there is evidence of a potential
substance abuse problem.
According to the MAJORS website, this program is active
in 56 of North Carolina’s 100 counties. To learn more about
MAJORS go to <www.ncmajors.org/>. IN THIS ISSUE: CHILD WELFARE AND JUVENILE JUSTICE IN NORTH CAROLINA
Family & Children’s Resource Program
Jordan Institute for Families
UNC–School of Social Work
Campus Box 3550
Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3550
State Courier # 17-61-04
Children ’s Services Practice Notes
FIRST CLASS
U.S. Postage
P A I D
Permit No. 177
Chapel Hill, NC